Accountant General to pay, then evidence of this direction should have been apparent on the face of the Memo, or at best, on the Payment Voucher. This means that the Records of Payment of the Cheques to the Permanent Secretary would have been evident, and the Accountant from the Accountant General’s Office would have signed the Payment Vouchers. From Documentary Evidence, it appears that the Hon. Commissioner of Finance was bypassed in the Processing of these Funds, and if by Protocol, he was to direct the Accountant General to pay, then it could only postulate one of these two facts; either the instructions were passed by Mr. Dennis Nev directly to the Accountant, or the Defendant as Governor, directly passed the instruction to the Accountant. From all other Memos and Vouchers before the Court, it was customary to see the Confirmation and Signature of the Commissioner of Finance as well as the evidence of the Cheque (s) for a particular transaction. This was a Rare Occurrence!!! According to Mr. Nev, the Payment Vouchers serve as Authority to the Payee to collect the Funds, but a careful perusal of each Payment Voucher in ExhibitsO1, O2 and O3, show that the NAME and DESIGNATION of the Payee and Collector of these Funds were conspicuously absent from the Memos, making the recipient of the Funds anonymous. It was only a Signature seen in that Column, and it did not say to whom it belonged. This was an irregularity of Government Procedure, and a Breach of Due Process, as well as undoubtedly, a Breach of the Financial Instructions of Taraba State. The Defendant, under Cross Examination disagreed with the Prosecution that he put pressure on Mr. Nev to sideline the Administrative/Due Process of going through the Ministry of Finance, through the Commissioner of Finance, and to have the Monies released to Mr. Nev. He maintained that since the Memos were signed, Due Process was meant to be followed. 183